User talk:RagnarsTrueSon

January 2021

Hello, I'm JalenFolf. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Clubtail have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Jalen Folf (talk) 05:31, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Clubtail. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Jalen Folf (talk) 20:41, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Clubtail, you may be blocked from editing. NJD-DE (talk) 21:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RagnarsTrueSon, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Jalen Folf (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RagnarsTrueSon. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

RagnarsTrueSon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi again, this is from the label, we're just trying to do our job, please unblock us. Thanks

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 23:03, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Note also, shared accounts aren't permitted and you'll want to read WP:COI and WP:PAID and WP:PROMO before making another unblock request. --Yamla (talk) 23:03, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

RagnarsTrueSon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi this is from the label, please unblock us we are just trying to do our job. This addresses the multiple accounts. Yes. It's us. Seems that the user User:JalenFolf is biased against us. We are just trying to set up a page if you think it's promotional we're happy to discuss, but we have plenty of sources indicating it's absolutely standard/ok. Blocking us for multiple accounts because of it would also be a misuse of Wikipedia functions on User:JalenFolf 's end. Please unblock us, we did nothing wrong, and you're injuring our progress. 1-We understand, we're not wikipedia experts, we're just trying to set up a page for an artist; 2-was never even remotely the intention 3-exactly our goal. Thanks again : )

Decline reason:

You don't seem to have any interest in reading the links that people have provided. Why would we unblock someone who has no interest in following our rules? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:56, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

RagnarsTrueSon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This new decline reason is even more biased. This doesn't even pose as factual. Surely an opinion by user User:NinjaRobotPirate is not enough to prompt a block. Suppose you know exactly what we read or not? What kind of reasoning is this?

Decline reason:

As you cannot take the time to review the multiple policy and guideline breaches that led to your block, administrators will no longer review the repeated appeals you make that fail to address the reasons for the block. As your talk page access has been revoked, any further appeals will need to be made via WP:UTRS.Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

If you will be appealing via WP:UTRS, please ensure you review WP:GAB prior to doing so.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:25, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. UTRS appeal almost identical to what was already declined. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just doing your jobs

Please read and affirm understanding of WP:PAID and WP:COI. Wikipedia is for the most part not interested in what a subject's hirelings have to say about the subject. Apart from the sock puppetry, if this is your only purpose in editing Wikipedia, you will not be unblocked. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS 39217 declined

UTRS appeal #39217 declined.

At this time, the English Wikipedia unblock team is declining your unblock request and will not hear your case anymore. Your final avenue of appeal is to email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-en

wikimedia.org. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]